Zexagon wrote:
We have a huge void which is impossible to fill.......... Why are they pursuing a civil action against the insurers? Not money surely?

IDIOT

[quote][p][bold]Zexagon[/bold] wrote:
We have a huge void which is impossible to fill.......... Why are they pursuing a civil action against the insurers? Not money surely?[/p][/quote]IDIOTandysaints007

Zexagon wrote:
We have a huge void which is impossible to fill.......... Why are they pursuing a civil action against the insurers? Not money surely?

IDIOT

Not only a one word answer again? That's unlike you? Why don't you actually provide an answer you thick tvvat

[quote][p][bold]andysaints007[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]Zexagon[/bold] wrote:
We have a huge void which is impossible to fill.......... Why are they pursuing a civil action against the insurers? Not money surely?[/p][/quote]IDIOT[/p][/quote]Not only a one word answer again? That's unlike you? Why don't you actually provide an answer you thick tvvatZexagon

They're pursuing a civil claim to try and hurt the person that killed their son because the law once again lets people down. The driver's actions\choices have resulted in them killing somebody but because a car is involved the law allows that. In any other circumstance were you to kill somebody through a choice as stupid as this one, you would be standing trial for murder\manslaughter and doing time, but because a car is involved the victims and their family's are let down again and again! This was not an accident! so should have been treated as one.

To drive you are meant to meet certain standards every day not just for your test!

Driving is privilege not a right!

I hope out of respect the driver never gets behind the wheel of a car again.

RIP

They're pursuing a civil claim to try and hurt the person that killed their son because the law once again lets people down. The driver's actions\choices have resulted in them killing somebody but because a car is involved the law allows that. In any other circumstance were you to kill somebody through a choice as stupid as this one, you would be standing trial for murder\manslaughter and doing time, but because a car is involved the victims and their family's are let down again and again! This was not an accident! so should have been treated as one.
To drive you are meant to meet certain standards every day not just for your test!
Driving is privilege not a right!
I hope out of respect the driver never gets behind the wheel of a car again.
RIPAFrustratedCyclist

KA wrote:
Why shouldn't they make a claim?.. they lost their son because Leuschner fell asleep at the wheel!

I just think it devalues their sons life. I could understand it if he was alive and needed permanent care. I couldn't do it. Spending the money would make me feel guilty

[quote][p][bold]KA[/bold] wrote:
Why shouldn't they make a claim?.. they lost their son because Leuschner fell asleep at the wheel![/p][/quote]I just think it devalues their sons life. I could understand it if he was alive and needed permanent care. I couldn't do it. Spending the money would make me feel guiltyZexagon

AFrustratedCyclist wrote:
They're pursuing a civil claim to try and hurt the person that killed their son because the law once again lets people down. The driver's actions\choices have resulted in them killing somebody but because a car is involved the law allows that. In any other circumstance were you to kill somebody through a choice as stupid as this one, you would be standing trial for murder\manslaughter and doing time, but because a car is involved the victims and their family's are let down again and again! This was not an accident! so should have been treated as one.

To drive you are meant to meet certain standards every day not just for your test!

Driving is privilege not a right!

I hope out of respect the driver never gets behind the wheel of a car again.

RIP

What was it if it wasn't an accident?

[quote][p][bold]AFrustratedCyclist[/bold] wrote:
They're pursuing a civil claim to try and hurt the person that killed their son because the law once again lets people down. The driver's actions\choices have resulted in them killing somebody but because a car is involved the law allows that. In any other circumstance were you to kill somebody through a choice as stupid as this one, you would be standing trial for murder\manslaughter and doing time, but because a car is involved the victims and their family's are let down again and again! This was not an accident! so should have been treated as one.
To drive you are meant to meet certain standards every day not just for your test!
Driving is privilege not a right!
I hope out of respect the driver never gets behind the wheel of a car again.
RIP[/p][/quote]What was it if it wasn't an accident?Zexagon

Zexagon wrote:
We have a huge void which is impossible to fill.......... Why are they pursuing a civil action against the insurers? Not money surely?

IDIOT

Not only a one word answer again? That's unlike you? Why don't you actually provide an answer you thick tvvat

Ooooops sorry. What I should have said was, you are a pathetic, sad, boring individual who seems to have nothing better to do than come on here all the time and whinge and moan like a little girl.

[quote][p][bold]Zexagon[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]andysaints007[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]Zexagon[/bold] wrote:
We have a huge void which is impossible to fill.......... Why are they pursuing a civil action against the insurers? Not money surely?[/p][/quote]IDIOT[/p][/quote]Not only a one word answer again? That's unlike you? Why don't you actually provide an answer you thick tvvat[/p][/quote]Ooooops sorry. What I should have said was, you are a pathetic, sad, boring individual who seems to have nothing better to do than come on here all the time and whinge and moan like a little girl.andysaints007

AFrustratedCyclist wrote:
They're pursuing a civil claim to try and hurt the person that killed their son because the law once again lets people down. The driver's actions\choices have resulted in them killing somebody but because a car is involved the law allows that. In any other circumstance were you to kill somebody through a choice as stupid as this one, you would be standing trial for murder\manslaughter and doing time, but because a car is involved the victims and their family's are let down again and again! This was not an accident! so should have been treated as one.

To drive you are meant to meet certain standards every day not just for your test!

Driving is privilege not a right!

I hope out of respect the driver never gets behind the wheel of a car again.

RIP

What was it if it wasn't an accident?

It was a decision to drive while tired to the point where they actually fell asleep. The driver didn't accidentally fall into the car, accidentally start it, and accidentally drive away while extremely tired did they?

no then it wasn't an accident was it!

The dictionary definition of an accident:
An unfortunate incident that happens unexpectedly and unintentionally, typically resulting in damage or injury.

Unexpectedly! Would it be unexpected to fall asleep if you're very tired? No of course not.

[quote][p][bold]Zexagon[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]AFrustratedCyclist[/bold] wrote:
They're pursuing a civil claim to try and hurt the person that killed their son because the law once again lets people down. The driver's actions\choices have resulted in them killing somebody but because a car is involved the law allows that. In any other circumstance were you to kill somebody through a choice as stupid as this one, you would be standing trial for murder\manslaughter and doing time, but because a car is involved the victims and their family's are let down again and again! This was not an accident! so should have been treated as one.
To drive you are meant to meet certain standards every day not just for your test!
Driving is privilege not a right!
I hope out of respect the driver never gets behind the wheel of a car again.
RIP[/p][/quote]What was it if it wasn't an accident?[/p][/quote]It was a decision to drive while tired to the point where they actually fell asleep. The driver didn't accidentally fall into the car, accidentally start it, and accidentally drive away while extremely tired did they?
no then it wasn't an accident was it!
The dictionary definition of an accident:
An unfortunate incident that happens unexpectedly and unintentionally, typically resulting in damage or injury.
Unexpectedly! Would it be unexpected to fall asleep if you're very tired? No of course not.AFrustratedCyclist

Zexagon wrote:
We have a huge void which is impossible to fill.......... Why are they pursuing a civil action against the insurers? Not money surely?

IDIOT

Not only a one word answer again? That's unlike you? Why don't you actually provide an answer you thick tvvat

Ooooops sorry. What I should have said was, you are a pathetic, sad, boring individual who seems to have nothing better to do than come on here all the time and whinge and moan like a little girl.

Unlike you .Who can't string more than a few words together. Moan like a little girl? You really are 12 aren't you? I see you're hardly ever on here are you?
You really are a complete Pratt. That's one from your repertoire

[quote][p][bold]andysaints007[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]Zexagon[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]andysaints007[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]Zexagon[/bold] wrote:
We have a huge void which is impossible to fill.......... Why are they pursuing a civil action against the insurers? Not money surely?[/p][/quote]IDIOT[/p][/quote]Not only a one word answer again? That's unlike you? Why don't you actually provide an answer you thick tvvat[/p][/quote]Ooooops sorry. What I should have said was, you are a pathetic, sad, boring individual who seems to have nothing better to do than come on here all the time and whinge and moan like a little girl.[/p][/quote]Unlike you .Who can't string more than a few words together. Moan like a little girl? You really are 12 aren't you? I see you're hardly ever on here are you?
You really are a complete Pratt. That's one from your repertoireZexagon

Zexagon wrote:
We have a huge void which is impossible to fill.......... Why are they pursuing a civil action against the insurers? Not money surely?

IDIOT

Not only a one word answer again? That's unlike you? Why don't you actually provide an answer you thick tvvat

Ooooops sorry. What I should have said was, you are a pathetic, sad, boring individual who seems to have nothing better to do than come on here all the time and whinge and moan like a little girl.

Unlike you .Who can't string more than a few words together. Moan like a little girl? You really are 12 aren't you? I see you're hardly ever on here are you?
You really are a complete Pratt. That's one from your repertoire

Niw that's funny ;-) Thanks for making my day, you little bore xx

[quote][p][bold]Zexagon[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]andysaints007[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]Zexagon[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]andysaints007[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]Zexagon[/bold] wrote:
We have a huge void which is impossible to fill.......... Why are they pursuing a civil action against the insurers? Not money surely?[/p][/quote]IDIOT[/p][/quote]Not only a one word answer again? That's unlike you? Why don't you actually provide an answer you thick tvvat[/p][/quote]Ooooops sorry. What I should have said was, you are a pathetic, sad, boring individual who seems to have nothing better to do than come on here all the time and whinge and moan like a little girl.[/p][/quote]Unlike you .Who can't string more than a few words together. Moan like a little girl? You really are 12 aren't you? I see you're hardly ever on here are you?
You really are a complete Pratt. That's one from your repertoire[/p][/quote]Niw that's funny ;-) Thanks for making my day, you little bore xxandysaints007

Zexagon wrote:
We have a huge void which is impossible to fill.......... Why are they pursuing a civil action against the insurers? Not money surely?

IDIOT

Not only a one word answer again? That's unlike you? Why don't you actually provide an answer you thick tvvat

Ooooops sorry. What I should have said was, you are a pathetic, sad, boring individual who seems to have nothing better to do than come on here all the time and whinge and moan like a little girl.

Unlike you .Who can't string more than a few words together. Moan like a little girl? You really are 12 aren't you? I see you're hardly ever on here are you?
You really are a complete Pratt. That's one from your repertoire

Now that's funny ;-) Thanks for making my day, you little bore xx
Thought I better alter the spelling mistake before it sends you off on one
MWAH x

[quote][p][bold]Zexagon[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]andysaints007[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]Zexagon[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]andysaints007[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]Zexagon[/bold] wrote:
We have a huge void which is impossible to fill.......... Why are they pursuing a civil action against the insurers? Not money surely?[/p][/quote]IDIOT[/p][/quote]Not only a one word answer again? That's unlike you? Why don't you actually provide an answer you thick tvvat[/p][/quote]Ooooops sorry. What I should have said was, you are a pathetic, sad, boring individual who seems to have nothing better to do than come on here all the time and whinge and moan like a little girl.[/p][/quote]Unlike you .Who can't string more than a few words together. Moan like a little girl? You really are 12 aren't you? I see you're hardly ever on here are you?
You really are a complete Pratt. That's one from your repertoire[/p][/quote]Now that's funny ;-) Thanks for making my day, you little bore xx
Thought I better alter the spelling mistake before it sends you off on one
MWAH xandysaints007

Zexagon wrote:
We have a huge void which is impossible to fill.......... Why are they pursuing a civil action against the insurers? Not money surely?

IDIOT

Not only a one word answer again? That's unlike you? Why don't you actually provide an answer you thick tvvat

Ooooops sorry. What I should have said was, you are a pathetic, sad, boring individual who seems to have nothing better to do than come on here all the time and whinge and moan like a little girl.

Unlike you .Who can't string more than a few words together. Moan like a little girl? You really are 12 aren't you? I see you're hardly ever on here are you?
You really are a complete Pratt. That's one from your repertoire

Now that's funny ;-) Thanks for making my day, you little bore xx
Thought I better alter the spelling mistake before it sends you off on one
MWAH x

That's made your day? Quite a life you lead.Spelling mistakes don't do anything for me. It's nice to see you say more than one word though,keep it up ;-)

[quote][p][bold]andysaints007[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]Zexagon[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]andysaints007[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]Zexagon[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]andysaints007[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]Zexagon[/bold] wrote:
We have a huge void which is impossible to fill.......... Why are they pursuing a civil action against the insurers? Not money surely?[/p][/quote]IDIOT[/p][/quote]Not only a one word answer again? That's unlike you? Why don't you actually provide an answer you thick tvvat[/p][/quote]Ooooops sorry. What I should have said was, you are a pathetic, sad, boring individual who seems to have nothing better to do than come on here all the time and whinge and moan like a little girl.[/p][/quote]Unlike you .Who can't string more than a few words together. Moan like a little girl? You really are 12 aren't you? I see you're hardly ever on here are you?
You really are a complete Pratt. That's one from your repertoire[/p][/quote]Now that's funny ;-) Thanks for making my day, you little bore xx
Thought I better alter the spelling mistake before it sends you off on one
MWAH x[/p][/quote]That's made your day? Quite a life you lead.Spelling mistakes don't do anything for me. It's nice to see you say more than one word though,keep it up ;-)Zexagon

AFrustratedCyclist wrote:
They're pursuing a civil claim to try and hurt the person that killed their son because the law once again lets people down. The driver's actions\choices have resulted in them killing somebody but because a car is involved the law allows that. In any other circumstance were you to kill somebody through a choice as stupid as this one, you would be standing trial for murder\manslaughter and doing time, but because a car is involved the victims and their family's are let down again and again! This was not an accident! so should have been treated as one.

To drive you are meant to meet certain standards every day not just for your test!

Driving is privilege not a right!

I hope out of respect the driver never gets behind the wheel of a car again.

RIP

What was it if it wasn't an accident?

It was a decision to drive while tired to the point where they actually fell asleep. The driver didn't accidentally fall into the car, accidentally start it, and accidentally drive away while extremely tired did they?

no then it wasn't an accident was it!

The dictionary definition of an accident:
An unfortunate incident that happens unexpectedly and unintentionally, typically resulting in damage or injury.

Unexpectedly! Would it be unexpected to fall asleep if you're very tired? No of course not.

So she got in the car with the intention of falling asleep and killing her boyfriend and possibly herself? And are you saying if it was her brother who died in the accident you'd want her to go to prison. The boyfriend knew she was tired so he's at fault too for getting into the car knowing she may fall asleep and crash

[quote][p][bold]AFrustratedCyclist[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]Zexagon[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]AFrustratedCyclist[/bold] wrote:
They're pursuing a civil claim to try and hurt the person that killed their son because the law once again lets people down. The driver's actions\choices have resulted in them killing somebody but because a car is involved the law allows that. In any other circumstance were you to kill somebody through a choice as stupid as this one, you would be standing trial for murder\manslaughter and doing time, but because a car is involved the victims and their family's are let down again and again! This was not an accident! so should have been treated as one.
To drive you are meant to meet certain standards every day not just for your test!
Driving is privilege not a right!
I hope out of respect the driver never gets behind the wheel of a car again.
RIP[/p][/quote]What was it if it wasn't an accident?[/p][/quote]It was a decision to drive while tired to the point where they actually fell asleep. The driver didn't accidentally fall into the car, accidentally start it, and accidentally drive away while extremely tired did they?
no then it wasn't an accident was it!
The dictionary definition of an accident:
An unfortunate incident that happens unexpectedly and unintentionally, typically resulting in damage or injury.
Unexpectedly! Would it be unexpected to fall asleep if you're very tired? No of course not.[/p][/quote]So she got in the car with the intention of falling asleep and killing her boyfriend and possibly herself? And are you saying if it was her brother who died in the accident you'd want her to go to prison. The boyfriend knew she was tired so he's at fault too for getting into the car knowing she may fall asleep and crashZexagon

I could have easily been the other way round and Im sure Bianca's family would be doing the same as Elliots. As it is, both families have suffered a tragedy. The Hardings have lost their son, brother, uncle, nephew and grandchild whilst the Leuschner's have had to support Bianca through a trial not to mention the life-long guilt of being responsible for the death of a loved one.
Ian and Irene are wonderful loving people and I was lucky enough to be a part of their family for nearly 4 years. When you decide to make a comment on these articles please stop for a second and remember that these are real people who have suffered an awful loss and that you also don't have enough details to make a judgment.

R.I.P smelliot lots of love x

I could have easily been the other way round and Im sure Bianca's family would be doing the same as Elliots. As it is, both families have suffered a tragedy. The Hardings have lost their son, brother, uncle, nephew and grandchild whilst the Leuschner's have had to support Bianca through a trial not to mention the life-long guilt of being responsible for the death of a loved one.
Ian and Irene are wonderful loving people and I was lucky enough to be a part of their family for nearly 4 years. When you decide to make a comment on these articles please stop for a second and remember that these are real people who have suffered an awful loss and that you also don't have enough details to make a judgment.
R.I.P smelliot lots of love xAime88

Aime88 wrote:
I could have easily been the other way round and Im sure Bianca's family would be doing the same as Elliots. As it is, both families have suffered a tragedy. The Hardings have lost their son, brother, uncle, nephew and grandchild whilst the Leuschner's have had to support Bianca through a trial not to mention the life-long guilt of being responsible for the death of a loved one.
Ian and Irene are wonderful loving people and I was lucky enough to be a part of their family for nearly 4 years. When you decide to make a comment on these articles please stop for a second and remember that these are real people who have suffered an awful loss and that you also don't have enough details to make a judgment.

R.I.P smelliot lots of love x

Well said
and until this sad event happens to you, nobody can say how they would feel and what they would do

[quote][p][bold]Aime88[/bold] wrote:
I could have easily been the other way round and Im sure Bianca's family would be doing the same as Elliots. As it is, both families have suffered a tragedy. The Hardings have lost their son, brother, uncle, nephew and grandchild whilst the Leuschner's have had to support Bianca through a trial not to mention the life-long guilt of being responsible for the death of a loved one.
Ian and Irene are wonderful loving people and I was lucky enough to be a part of their family for nearly 4 years. When you decide to make a comment on these articles please stop for a second and remember that these are real people who have suffered an awful loss and that you also don't have enough details to make a judgment.
R.I.P smelliot lots of love x[/p][/quote]Well said
and until this sad event happens to you, nobody can say how they would feel and what they would domickey01

Zexagon wrote:
We have a huge void which is impossible to fill.......... Why are they pursuing a civil action against the insurers? Not money surely?

Weirdo.

[quote][p][bold]Zexagon[/bold] wrote:
We have a huge void which is impossible to fill.......... Why are they pursuing a civil action against the insurers? Not money surely?[/p][/quote]Weirdo.Sir Ad E Noid

AFrustratedCyclist wrote:
They're pursuing a civil claim to try and hurt the person that killed their son because the law once again lets people down. The driver's actions\choices have resulted in them killing somebody but because a car is involved the law allows that. In any other circumstance were you to kill somebody through a choice as stupid as this one, you would be standing trial for murder\manslaughter and doing time, but because a car is involved the victims and their family's are let down again and again! This was not an accident! so should have been treated as one.

To drive you are meant to meet certain standards every day not just for your test!

Driving is privilege not a right!

I hope out of respect the driver never gets behind the wheel of a car again.

RIP

What was it if it wasn't an accident?

It is a RTI, a road traffic incident, and fatal. It was not an accident.

[quote][p][bold]Zexagon[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]AFrustratedCyclist[/bold] wrote:
They're pursuing a civil claim to try and hurt the person that killed their son because the law once again lets people down. The driver's actions\choices have resulted in them killing somebody but because a car is involved the law allows that. In any other circumstance were you to kill somebody through a choice as stupid as this one, you would be standing trial for murder\manslaughter and doing time, but because a car is involved the victims and their family's are let down again and again! This was not an accident! so should have been treated as one.
To drive you are meant to meet certain standards every day not just for your test!
Driving is privilege not a right!
I hope out of respect the driver never gets behind the wheel of a car again.
RIP[/p][/quote]What was it if it wasn't an accident?[/p][/quote]It is a RTI, a road traffic incident, and fatal. It was not an accident.Sir Ad E Noid

AFrustratedCyclist wrote:
They're pursuing a civil claim to try and hurt the person that killed their son because the law once again lets people down. The driver's actions\choices have resulted in them killing somebody but because a car is involved the law allows that. In any other circumstance were you to kill somebody through a choice as stupid as this one, you would be standing trial for murder\manslaughter and doing time, but because a car is involved the victims and their family's are let down again and again! This was not an accident! so should have been treated as one.

To drive you are meant to meet certain standards every day not just for your test!

Driving is privilege not a right!

I hope out of respect the driver never gets behind the wheel of a car again.

RIP

What was it if it wasn't an accident?

It is a RTI, a road traffic incident, and fatal. It was not an accident.

"Grahame Short, coroner for Southampton and the New Forest determined that the former oil refinery worker from Woolston died as a result of a road traffic accident on August 21, 2011."

ACCIDENT I'm sure millions of people drive tired, never intending to have an accident. She was irresponsible not homicidal.

You all seem to be missing the actual point of the article!

They are trying to raise awareness of the dangers of driving tired. The blame has been laid and the trial is over, now they want to try and stop people making the same mistake. They can't tell people how dangerous it can be without writing about what happened to Elliot so it has to be included in the article.

How is it that none of the comments so far have been relevant to the actual topic?
DRIVE RESPONSIBLY, YOU ARE IN CONTROL OF A LETHAL WEAPON!

[quote][p][bold]Sir Ad E Noid[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]Zexagon[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]AFrustratedCyclist[/bold] wrote:
They're pursuing a civil claim to try and hurt the person that killed their son because the law once again lets people down. The driver's actions\choices have resulted in them killing somebody but because a car is involved the law allows that. In any other circumstance were you to kill somebody through a choice as stupid as this one, you would be standing trial for murder\manslaughter and doing time, but because a car is involved the victims and their family's are let down again and again! This was not an accident! so should have been treated as one.
To drive you are meant to meet certain standards every day not just for your test!
Driving is privilege not a right!
I hope out of respect the driver never gets behind the wheel of a car again.
RIP[/p][/quote]What was it if it wasn't an accident?[/p][/quote]It is a RTI, a road traffic incident, and fatal. It was not an accident.[/p][/quote]"Grahame Short, coroner for Southampton and the New Forest determined that the former oil refinery worker from Woolston died as a result of a road traffic accident on August 21, 2011."
ACCIDENT I'm sure millions of people drive tired, never intending to have an accident. She was irresponsible not homicidal.
You all seem to be missing the actual point of the article!
They are trying to raise awareness of the dangers of driving tired. The blame has been laid and the trial is over, now they want to try and stop people making the same mistake. They can't tell people how dangerous it can be without writing about what happened to Elliot so it has to be included in the article.
How is it that none of the comments so far have been relevant to the actual topic?
DRIVE RESPONSIBLY, YOU ARE IN CONTROL OF A LETHAL WEAPON!Aime88

AFrustratedCyclist wrote:
They're pursuing a civil claim to try and hurt the person that killed their son because the law once again lets people down. The driver's actions\choices have resulted in them killing somebody but because a car is involved the law allows that. In any other circumstance were you to kill somebody through a choice as stupid as this one, you would be standing trial for murder\manslaughter and doing time, but because a car is involved the victims and their family's are let down again and again! This was not an accident! so should have been treated as one.

To drive you are meant to meet certain standards every day not just for your test!

Driving is privilege not a right!

I hope out of respect the driver never gets behind the wheel of a car again.

RIP

What was it if it wasn't an accident?

It is a RTI, a road traffic incident, and fatal. It was not an accident.

The coroner seems to think it was a road traffic accident. Shall I see if I can find his number for you to put him straight?

[quote][p][bold]Sir Ad E Noid[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]Zexagon[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]AFrustratedCyclist[/bold] wrote:
They're pursuing a civil claim to try and hurt the person that killed their son because the law once again lets people down. The driver's actions\choices have resulted in them killing somebody but because a car is involved the law allows that. In any other circumstance were you to kill somebody through a choice as stupid as this one, you would be standing trial for murder\manslaughter and doing time, but because a car is involved the victims and their family's are let down again and again! This was not an accident! so should have been treated as one.
To drive you are meant to meet certain standards every day not just for your test!
Driving is privilege not a right!
I hope out of respect the driver never gets behind the wheel of a car again.
RIP[/p][/quote]What was it if it wasn't an accident?[/p][/quote]It is a RTI, a road traffic incident, and fatal. It was not an accident.[/p][/quote]The coroner seems to think it was a road traffic accident. Shall I see if I can find his number for you to put him straight?Zexagon

Zexagon wrote:
We have a huge void which is impossible to fill.......... Why are they pursuing a civil action against the insurers? Not money surely?

IDIOT

Not only a one word answer again? That's unlike you? Why don't you actually provide an answer you thick tvvat

Ooooops sorry. What I should have said was, you are a pathetic, sad, boring individual who seems to have nothing better to do than come on here all the time and whinge and moan like a little girl.

Unlike you .Who can't string more than a few words together. Moan like a little girl? You really are 12 aren't you? I see you're hardly ever on here are you?
You really are a complete Pratt. That's one from your repertoire

Now that's funny ;-) Thanks for making my day, you little bore xx
Thought I better alter the spelling mistake before it sends you off on one
MWAH x

That's made your day? Quite a life you lead.Spelling mistakes don't do anything for me. It's nice to see you say more than one word though,keep it up ;-)

Quite a life, yes - but still not as boring as yours you little saddo xx

[quote][p][bold]Zexagon[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]andysaints007[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]Zexagon[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]andysaints007[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]Zexagon[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]andysaints007[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]Zexagon[/bold] wrote:
We have a huge void which is impossible to fill.......... Why are they pursuing a civil action against the insurers? Not money surely?[/p][/quote]IDIOT[/p][/quote]Not only a one word answer again? That's unlike you? Why don't you actually provide an answer you thick tvvat[/p][/quote]Ooooops sorry. What I should have said was, you are a pathetic, sad, boring individual who seems to have nothing better to do than come on here all the time and whinge and moan like a little girl.[/p][/quote]Unlike you .Who can't string more than a few words together. Moan like a little girl? You really are 12 aren't you? I see you're hardly ever on here are you?
You really are a complete Pratt. That's one from your repertoire[/p][/quote]Now that's funny ;-) Thanks for making my day, you little bore xx
Thought I better alter the spelling mistake before it sends you off on one
MWAH x[/p][/quote]That's made your day? Quite a life you lead.Spelling mistakes don't do anything for me. It's nice to see you say more than one word though,keep it up ;-)[/p][/quote]Quite a life, yes - but still not as boring as yours you little saddo xxandysaints007